Rodriguez v. Fox News Network, L.L.C., 238 Ariz. 36

An armed carjacking suspect led police on a high-speed chase that ended with him shooting himself after exiting the vehicle.
Fox News Network, LLC broadcast the chase and suicide live, including the moment the suspect shot himself.
The sons of the suspect learned of their father’s death after seeing a clip of the broadcast online.
Their mother sued Fox on behalf of the minors for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
The superior court dismissed the claims, holding First Amendment protection barred liability.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether First Amendment protects against emotional distress claims	Rodriguez argues the broadcast caused trauma and should not be immunized.	Fox contends claims are barred because the content involved matters of public concern.	Yes; the First Amendment bars the claims.

Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011) (speech on public concerns protected even when painful)
Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (1983) (public concern and content/context analysis)
Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988) (breathing space for robust public discourse; protection of content)
Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc., 472 U.S. 749 (1985) (speech on private matters received less protection; chilling effects)
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) (First Amendment protects uninhibited, robust debate on public issues)
Boos v. Barry, 485 U.S. 312 (1988) (tolerating provocative speech to protect First Amendment rights)
Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986) (truth requirement would chill public debate)
Cox Broad. Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469 (1975) (public interest in reporting on events; access to information)
Florida Star v. B.J.F., 491 U.S. 524 (1989) (newsworthiness and public significance of information)
Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coal., Inc., 535 U.S. 234 (2002) (redeeming value of work judged in its entirety)